@Sven Groot: Fair enough.
I would like to see costs set out against income. And I would like a quality measurement (deaths, complications, malpractices, etc.).
Then you can judge if what people are paying as a percentage of income and what quality care they are getting in return. Then you would be able to judge if people are paying a fair price for the services they receive. Just comparing money is way to simplistic for me to go by.
A good indication of quality care is maternal mortality. In a high quality care environment this should be a low figure;
Then you would have a broad figure on which system provides the best care for the best price.
'We just do it this way' is another argument from authority.
For the rest, see my reply to Sven.
While I see your point about me spreading FUD, because I don't have any data to back it up. It's just my belief that government cannot plan resources efficiently, because they lack the incentive to compete. So they will drive costs up by definition. While buying in bulk reduces costs, NHS is a monopoly and will only drive costs up, because it lacks competition.
Healthcare wasn't always this expensive. In the good old days you could get a years worth of healthcare for days wage. Ever since government got involved, those days have increased to weeks. It was the physicians in cahoots with government that drove up the cost, because it's a hard nut to swallow as a physician that you are at the whim of these pesky patients.
Now of course you can play your Zimbabwe card again, but also consider other goods and services. The car was is a product of the free market. The innovation in the free market has made this method of transportation available for everybody. As a result life expectancy leaped forward, increasing the quality of all humans. Look at Windows, also a feat of the free market, increased the quality of our lives as well. No government program has ever increased the quality of our lives, it's all a product of the free market. People pursuing their individual interests and as a result creating a better society.
Given the reputation of government and the reputation of the free market, how in the world can you opt for more government control? It's beyond me.